but why? That's as silly as not counting Kendall/Gonti's first year.
Based on exactly...what?
Keim in his years after BA was just as bad at drafting, maybe worse. I do miss his FA trades/acquisitions, and even his stupid hyperbole at the drafts, but every other measurable seems to be a wash or worse than Monti.
Why do I throw out the BA years? Because we wouldn't have BA now and Keim without a strong head coach is mediocre, at best. The results of what he put together on the offensive side with Wilks is proof of his bad choices. The lack of a sustainable roster after having Kliff coaching for 4 years is another example of his bad abilities. If he wasn't good at FA acquisitions to duct tape a team together every year, I wouldn't really be able to point to anything positive of his abilities in his last 5 years.
Again, I do not like Monti's passivity in the trade market. I also do not know if it is influenced by this coaching staff claiming that Cody Simon is a good replacement for Mack Wilson.
I only look at rounds 1-5 in the draft, since 6-7 is a wash or for special teams, and I know that Monti drafted 5 corners, only 1 is a total bust so far. Keim only draft 2 in 5 years - 1 success.
Monti drafted 2 WR - Wilson is turning out to be good, Harrison undecided - Keim drafted 4, Kirk ended up pretty good, the others not so much (again, rds 1-5)
So Monti in 3 years has more sustainability in those positions than Keim in 5 years (IMO).
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/crd/lineups.htm (starting lineups)
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/crd/draft.htm (draft history)
I wasn't too impressed with Monti as the GM pick, I don't care if they fire him - but if I had to choose for the GM *right now*, it would still be Monti over Keim.